Mylan has agreed to pay $96.5 million to settle claims by drug purchasers that it delayed launching a generic version of Cephalon’s narcolepsy drug Provigil in exchange for payment from Cephalon.
The settlement was disclosed in a filing by the drug purchasers in Pennsylvania federal court on Friday, and must still be approved by the court.
The money will go to purchasers that bought brand-name Provigil from Cephalon directly, like wholesalers and distributors.
A group of direct purchasers sued Mylan, Cephalon and two other companies – Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and Ranbaxy Laboratories – in 2006. They brought their case on behalf of a nationwide class of direct purchasers.
The purchasers said Cephalon reached settlements in patent lawsuits it brought against Teva, Mylan and Ranbaxy in which it paid them to keep generic versions of Provigil off the market until 2012. The lawsuit said the settlements, reached in 2005 and 2006, violated federal antitrust law.
Teva bought Cephalon in 2011. In April 2015, it settled with the direct purchasers for $512 million.
In May 2015, it agreed to pay $1.2 billion to settle similar claims by the US Federal Trade Commission, which had separately sued Cephalon over the Provigil settlements.
Full Content: Reuters
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Massachusetts AG Sues Insulin Makers and PBMs Over Alleged Price-Fixing Scheme
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Apple and Amazon Avoid Mass Lawsuit in UK Over Alleged Collusion
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Top Agent Network Drops Antitrust Suit Against National Association of Realtors
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Weil, Gotshal & Manges Strengthens Antitrust Practice with New Partner
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Russian Court Imposes Hefty Fine on Google for Non-Compliance with Content Removal Orders
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand